no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Discussions / Restructuring the league Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 29 30 31 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
Captain Jack
|
posted: 2019-04-19 19:20:04 (ID: 100139045) Report Abuse |
|
prchaser wrote:
I think the bigger problem Elite causes is that it consumes too many teams from the 1.1 leagues, and many of the 1.1. leagues are lacking good teams. After getting relegated from Elite to Fire 1 last season, I slept through most of the regular season, went 14-2 and find myself back in Elite with minimal effort last season. When the 1.1 leagues are lacking adequate competition, the game is less fun for most of the players. This is drastic, but I'd be in favor of shrinking Elite to 8 teams, one from each league, creating two 4-team conferences. Each AC team would play each other 4x and then play each NC 1x (16 games). The bottom two teams in each division would be auto-relegated by the corresponding League Bowl winner and the other two teams would play a relegation game with their corresponding League Bowl winner. All teams in Elite would make the playoffs, but there would be no wild card round. On the other end of the spectrum, I would propose no team can qualify for League 1 until they've spent two full seasons in League 2 (I realize in some leagues, this would mean having bots in League 1 while having human players in League 2, but for the long-term health of the game, I think this is a necessary trade off). While many of the changes to the game have made it easier for new teams to acquire better talent, there still is a learning curve on other aspects of managing a team, chiefly tinkering with the PB. I think too many new teams are getting thrown into League 1 before they are ready creating a lot of frustration and ultimately players who don't last. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-04-19 20:53:32 (ID: 100139048) Report Abuse | |
|
prchaser wrote:
I think the bigger problem Elite causes is that it consumes too many teams from the 1.1 leagues, and many of the 1.1. leagues are lacking good teams. After getting relegated from Elite to Fire 1 last season, I slept through most of the regular season, went 14-2 and find myself back in Elite with minimal effort last season. When the 1.1 leagues are lacking adequate competition, the game is less fun for most of the players. This is drastic, but I'd be in favor of shrinking Elite to 8 teams, one from each league, creating two 4-team conferences. Each AC team would play each other 4x and then play each NC 1x (16 games). The bottom two teams in each division would be auto-relegated by the corresponding League Bowl winner and the other two teams would play a relegation game with their corresponding League Bowl winner. All teams in Elite would make the playoffs, but there would be no wild card round. On the other end of the spectrum, I would propose no team can qualify for League 1 until they've spent two full seasons in League 2 (I realize in some leagues, this would mean having bots in League 1 while having human players in League 2, but for the long-term health of the game, I think this is a necessary trade off). While many of the changes to the game have made it easier for new teams to acquire better talent, there still is a learning curve on other aspects of managing a team, chiefly tinkering with the PB. I think too many new teams are getting thrown into League 1 before they are ready creating a lot of frustration and ultimately players who don't last. I agree the league structure doesn't help - - i've made suggestions in the past, but there is a legacy league system that people don't want to change. I think for game like this, it would be optimal to have either a straight ladder (I.1, II.1, III.1 etc.) or steep pyramid (I.1, II.1 & II.2, III.1 & III.2 & III.3 & III.4 etc). This would provide the best sorting of teams by strength & ability. The problem is that it requires breaking up the legacy league structure and game times become difficult to manage. Steve SD Blitz |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-04-19 22:24:24 (ID: 100139049) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse | |
|
I like the idea of reducing the Elite to eight teams. Or eventually scratch Elite and have this as a “Champions League” kind of competition in the next season. You only qualify as One of the best four teams of your region and then you enter a playoff scheme directly with these 32 teams. Five match days and we have the champion.
Alternative, you are drawn in a group of four where every team plays each other. As in a friendly cup you move on as Top 2 of your group and then it’s playoffs. Like this it makes for seven match days. Eventually after this you do a second range as in soccers Euroleague where you o the same kind of tournament but with the teams 5-8 of each region. (Not sure about this one) Match days could be Friday. One argument against this would be the financial factor that would put all these teams in a stronger financial position. In this case fatigue would have to become a stronger factor. Last edited on 2019-04-19 22:26:55 by Buziano |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-04-20 01:15:56 (ID: 100139050) Report Abuse | |
|
Buziano wrote:
I like the idea of reducing the Elite to eight teams. Or eventually scratch Elite and have this as a “Champions League” kind of competition in the next season. You only qualify as One of the best four teams of your region and then you enter a playoff scheme directly with these 32 teams. Five match days and we have the champion. Alternative, you are drawn in a group of four where every team plays each other. As in a friendly cup you move on as Top 2 of your group and then it’s playoffs. Like this it makes for seven match days. Eventually after this you do a second range as in soccers Euroleague where you o the same kind of tournament but with the teams 5-8 of each region. (Not sure about this one) Match days could be Friday. One argument against this would be the financial factor that would put all these teams in a stronger financial position. In this case fatigue would have to become a stronger factor. But you say that Pete says. Buziano wrote:
As Pete says, he does not want to touch the structure of the leagues. It is 8 mini leagues having their current best 4 in Elite.(...) What did I miss ? Now I don't know what to say. 
 Source: https://media.giphy.com/media/HRNqHqiwbfrIQ/giphy.gif |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-04-20 07:20:00 (ID: 100139051) Report Abuse | |
|
Pete has expressed not wanting to change anything about the structure. The discussion is going on for years. So we search for ideas hoping that one day one idea will please Pete so that this game will improve and we won’t lose as many managers.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2019-04-20 08:02:19 (ID: 100139052) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse |
|
Solana_Steve wrote:
prchaser wrote:
I think the bigger problem Elite causes is that it consumes too many teams from the 1.1 leagues, and many of the 1.1. leagues are lacking good teams. After getting relegated from Elite to Fire 1 last season, I slept through most of the regular season, went 14-2 and find myself back in Elite with minimal effort last season. When the 1.1 leagues are lacking adequate competition, the game is less fun for most of the players. This is drastic, but I'd be in favor of shrinking Elite to 8 teams, one from each league, creating two 4-team conferences. Each AC team would play each other 4x and then play each NC 1x (16 games). The bottom two teams in each division would be auto-relegated by the corresponding League Bowl winner and the other two teams would play a relegation game with their corresponding League Bowl winner. All teams in Elite would make the playoffs, but there would be no wild card round. On the other end of the spectrum, I would propose no team can qualify for League 1 until they've spent two full seasons in League 2 (I realize in some leagues, this would mean having bots in League 1 while having human players in League 2, but for the long-term health of the game, I think this is a necessary trade off). While many of the changes to the game have made it easier for new teams to acquire better talent, there still is a learning curve on other aspects of managing a team, chiefly tinkering with the PB. I think too many new teams are getting thrown into League 1 before they are ready creating a lot of frustration and ultimately players who don't last. I agree the league structure doesn't help - - i've made suggestions in the past, but there is a legacy league system that people don't want to change. I think for game like this, it would be optimal to have either a straight ladder (I.1, II.1, III.1 etc.) or steep pyramid (I.1, II.1 & II.2, III.1 & III.2 & III.3 & III.4 etc). This would provide the best sorting of teams by strength & ability. The problem is that it requires breaking up the legacy league structure and game times become difficult to manage. Steve SD Blitz I agree with you Steve, a straight ladder or steep pyramid would work best and allow us all to play more competitive games but it's not "people" who don't wanna change the structure, it's Pete who said it would be almost impossible so we have to find alternative solutions. Last edited on 2019-04-20 08:02:47 by Meitheisman |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-04-20 08:17:48 (ID: 100139053) Report Abuse | |
|
The problem is likely that a lot of algorithms are based on the structure right now, so changing it means a lot of coding and it is likely something is missed.
Eventually it would be easier to create a new structure in parallel and migrate teams. Or scrap the game and open under a new structure. Remember this basically only a fun-to-offer-game, not really a professional organisation behind it. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-04-20 09:45:24 (ID: 100139055) Report Abuse | |
|
Just to refresh memories: the pyramid style structure we had, was removed by having consensus, and replaced with a D1.1 -> D2.1 -> D3.1 structure.
And, this was one season ago. So please, do not wonder if I do not join any "change the structure" discussion at the moment. It is not meant to be offensive. Much more I really dislike changing things "every 5 minutes". |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2019-04-20 16:06:57 (ID: 100139059) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse |
|
And this was a very positive change for everyone, we now all have fewer bots in our SC divisions which is great
Unfortunately in terms of league play the change did nothing for the 32 teams in Elite and the 256 teams in Division I. Last edited on 2019-04-20 16:07:24 by Meitheisman |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-04-21 04:01:27 (ID: 100139077) Report Abuse | |
|
pete wrote:
Just to refresh memories: the pyramid style structure we had, was removed by having consensus, and replaced with a D1.1 -> D2.1 -> D3.1 structure. And, this was one season ago. So please, do not wonder if I do not join any "change the structure" discussion at the moment. It is not meant to be offensive. Much more I really dislike changing things "every 5 minutes". Totally agree with that change. Still the formation between the D1.1 and the elite league is a flat pyramid....not a ladder or steep pyramid. My point was that if you had one or two leagues (instead of eight) feeding into the elite league, you'd be getting teams that are better prepared to compete in the elite league and the quality of play in the league just below the elite league would be much higher than in the current eight D1.1 leagues. Steve SD Blitz |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 29 30 31 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / Restructuring the league | |
